Time for Scientists to underpin Wikipedia

Wikipedia, the world's largest online encyclopaedia, is regarded with suspicion by some in the scientific community — perhaps because the wiki model is inconsistent with traditional academic scholarship (Nature 468, 359–360; 2010). But the time has come for scientists to engage more actively with Wikipedia.

Type any scientific term into any search engine and it is likely that a Wikipedia article will be the first hit. Ten years ago, it would have been inconceivable that a free collaborative website, written and maintained by volunteers, would dominate the global provision of knowledge. But Wikipedia is now the first port of call for people seeking information on subjects that include scientific topics. Like it or not, other scientists and the public are using it to get an overview of your specialist area.

Wikipedia's user-friendly global reach offers an unprecedented opportunity for public engagement with science. Scientists who receive public or charitable funding should therefore seize the opportunity to make sure that Wikipedia articles are understandable, scientifically accurate, well sourced and up-to-date.

Many in the scientific community will admit to using Wikipedia occasionally, yet few have contributed content. For society's sake, scientists must overcome their reluctance to embrace this resource. [Nature, 468:765]

Twitter predicts Stock Market ?

This study is really astounding. The researchers from Indiana University found likely correlations between the calmness index that can be tallied by twitter data and the price walk of stock market [http://www.technologyreview.com/blog/arxiv/25900/].

Today, Johan Bollen at Indiana University and a couple of pals say they've found just such a predictor buried in the seemingly mindless stream of words that emanates from the Twitterverse.

For some time now, researchers have attempted to extract useful information from this firehose. One idea is that the stream of thought is representative of the mental state of humankind at any instant. Various groups have devised algorithms to analyse this datastream hoping to use it to take the temperature of various human states.

One algorithm, called the Google-Profile of Mood States (GPOMS), records the level of six states: happiness, kindness, alertness, sureness, vitality and calmness.

The question that Bollen and co ask is whether any of these states correlates with stock market prices. After all, they say, it is not entirely beyond credence that the rise and fall of stock market prices is influenced by the public mood.

So these guys took 9.7 million tweets posted by 2.7 million tweeters between March and December 2008 and looked for correlations between the GPOMS indices and whether Dow Jones Industrial Average rose of fell each day.

Their extraordinary conclusion is that there really is a correlation between the Dow Jones Industrial Average and one of the GPOMS indices--calmness.

In fact, the calmness index appears to be a good predictor of whether the Dow Jones Industrial Average goes up or down between 2 and 6 days later. "We find an accuracy of 87.6% in predicting the daily up and down changes in the closing values of the Dow Jones Industrial Average," say Bollen and co

That's an incredible result--that a Twitter mood can predict the stock market--but the figures appear to point that way.

Is it really possible that the calmness index is correlated with the stock market? Maybe. Back in April we looked at some work showing how tweets about films can be used to predict box office takings.

But there are at least two good reasons to suspect that this result may not be all it seems. The first is the lack of plausible mechanism: how could the Twitter mood measured by the calmness index actually affect the Dow Jones Industrial Average up to six days later? Nobody knows.

The second is that the Twitter feeds Bollen and co used were not just from the US but from around the globe. Although it's probably a fair assumption that a good proportion of these tweeters were based in the US in 2008, there's no way of knowing what proportion. By this reckoning, tweeters in Timbuktu somehow help predict the Dow Jones Industrial Average.

If so, what might happen to the way people play with stocks ?